Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Case of Gay Worshiper in Virginia Splits Methodists
Washington Post ^ | 10/28/5 | Alan Cooperman

Posted on 10/28/2005 2:11:25 PM PDT by Crackingham

The man had been attending a Methodist church in South Hill, Va., for several months. He sang in the choir. He owned a business and was well known in the community. But when he asked to become a formal member of the church, the pastor turned him down, because he is gay.

Those are the bare facts of a case that has split a 650-member congregation in southern Virginia and that threatens to divide the 8 million-member United Methodist Church, the nation's second largest Protestant denomination.

Yesterday in Houston, the Methodists' highest court heard an appeal from the pastor of South Hill United Methodist Church, the Rev. Edward Johnson. He was placed on unpaid leave after he rejected entreaties from his immediate supervisor and his bishop to admit the gay man, who has not been named by church officials and has declined to talk about the case.

Nationally, the Methodist Church prohibits "self-avowed, practicing homosexuals" from serving as ordained ministers. But it has declared that gay men and lesbians are "persons of sacred worth" and has repeatedly said there are no bars to their participation as lay people.

"The theme of our church for five years now has been 'Open Hearts. Open Minds. Open Doors.' The issue here is, 'Are we really open or not?' " said the Rev. W. Anthony Layman, who was Johnson's district superintendent when the pastor was removed in June by a 581 to 20 vote of fellow ministers in the church's Virginia conference.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events; Philosophy; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: christianity; homosexualagenda; homosexuality; pastor; pervertperverts; perverts; pervertspervert; religion; religiousleft; schism; southhill; umc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 341-342 next last
To: muir_redwoods
My point has more to do with the mote in the other fellow's eyes and the beams in our own. Homosexuals are not the only persistant and unrepentent sinners among us under the laws of Christianity nor even the most common.

I agree. And I already said that if we ban sinners from church, all churches would be empty.

But I don't think a comparison between all over-weight people and unrepentant homosexuals who open push their life-style as OK with God is a fair one.

121 posted on 10/28/2005 8:05:04 PM PDT by Jorge (Q)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: xzins
He also said that divorce because of infidelity is acceptable.

Not in Mark. In Mark 10:11-12, Jesus said, "And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery." No escape clause for infidelity.

Therefore, "divorce + remarriage = adultery" is a description.

No, a fact. Jesus said that those who divorce and remarry are committing adultery against their former spouse. Adultery is a sin, a violation of the 6th or 7th Commandment, depending on your religion. How would you require those living such a sinful lifestyle to atone for their sins?

122 posted on 10/28/2005 8:06:36 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Jorge
Absolute BS.

Absolutely. Average women have a 25% body fat. Where did they get that fat? Rent it?

123 posted on 10/28/2005 8:10:02 PM PDT by AndrewC (Darwinian logic -- It is just-so if it is just-so)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
"He also said that divorce because of infidelity is acceptable."

Not in Mark. In Mark 10:11-12, Jesus said, "And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery." No escape clause for infidelity.

So are you saying Jesus contradicts Himself?

If so, why should we trust ANYTHING He says?

124 posted on 10/28/2005 8:12:54 PM PDT by Jorge (Q)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: I got the rope

I am sorry I did not know that you were totally free from sin and in such a state of Grace. I am not biblical you are right about that. When is your beatification? I would like to attend ,I never met a real saint before. One so totally free from sin as yourself must be a truly great thing to behold.


125 posted on 10/28/2005 8:21:10 PM PDT by sgtbono2002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

Matt 19:9 says: "I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."

Mark is not the only book in the bible.


126 posted on 10/28/2005 8:21:29 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Not in Mark. In Mark 10:11-12, Jesus said, "And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery." No escape clause for infidelity.

And Mark also leaves this out: " thou art an offence unto me"

Mat 16:23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

Mar 8:33 But when he had turned about and looked on his disciples, he rebuked Peter, saying, Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men.

Mat 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

From the Sermon on the mount. Later in answer to the Pharisees.

Mat 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except [it be] for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

127 posted on 10/28/2005 8:26:50 PM PDT by AndrewC (Darwinian logic -- It is just-so if it is just-so)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: js1138

No, people who sin openly and without a willingness to change their lives.
But, again, I presume you do not think that sodomy is a sin. Whatever it may be under the laws of Virginia, the Christian Church has always regarded it as sin.


128 posted on 10/28/2005 8:46:35 PM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Jorge

Furthermore, gluttons have not organized politically to compel others to accept their lifestyle. Speaking of, smokers are hard put to find a place to indulge their habits. It is widely regarded as unhealthy. Sodomy, which is an equally unhealthy habit, is protected by the law.


129 posted on 10/28/2005 8:51:31 PM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: sgtbono2002

Where in the Bible does the Saint (a Christian) have to have sinless perfection?

The way to reach any homosexual is to share the Law and bring the knowledge of sin to them.


130 posted on 10/28/2005 9:06:20 PM PDT by I got the rope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: WriteOn

"The question goes to repentance."

Agreed!


131 posted on 10/28/2005 11:58:12 PM PDT by Owl558 (Pardon my spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Mark is not the only book in the bible.

So Matthew outranks Mark? Why?

132 posted on 10/29/2005 3:43:52 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Jorge
So are you saying Jesus contradicts Himself?

You tell me.

If so, why should we trust ANYTHING He says?

It's not Him I mistrust. It's all those who insist on speaking in His name.

133 posted on 10/29/2005 3:45:09 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator

"How can you be a member of a religious organization and simultaneously act regularly and openly in outright defiance of its principles? No church worth the name would accept such a person."

That's why the pastor was removed by an overwhelming vote of his fellow VA Methodist ministers. The pastor's outright defiance cost him his job.


134 posted on 10/29/2005 3:53:32 AM PDT by calreaganfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mariabush

"No one is denying the man access to worship, only membership which means fellowship with others of like beliefs."

Were other prospective members treated in the same manner? Were their backgrounds checked to see if anything conflicted with Methodist beliefs? There are plenty of other sinners. Were they also denied membership?


135 posted on 10/29/2005 3:59:55 AM PDT by calreaganfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
How can you be a member of a religious organization and simultaneously act regularly and openly in outright defiance of its principles?

It's done every day...


136 posted on 10/29/2005 4:03:15 AM PDT by pageonetoo (You'll spot their posts soon enough!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Martin Tell

"He loudly announced his status, that he has no intention of ever stopping his activities and that he does not consider them sinful."

What about the millions of heterosexual couples who are cohabiting (not married)? Most, if not all, don't consider that behaviour to be sinful. Should they all be kicked out of the Church? The pews will be awfully empty!


137 posted on 10/29/2005 4:07:18 AM PDT by calreaganfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: I got the rope
The way to reach any homosexual is to share the Law and bring the knowledge of sin to them.

Didn't Jesus set us free from the law, of sin and death?

138 posted on 10/29/2005 4:08:24 AM PDT by pageonetoo (You'll spot their posts soon enough!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
"How can you be a member of a religious organization and simultaneously act regularly and openly in outright defiance of its principles? No church worth the name would accept such a person."

I don't understand this at all. The Methodist Church is now telling people they can't be part of a congregation if they're sinners? Excuse me, but I'm a sinner, and I'm a member of the Methodist Church, too. My understanding is that we all "fall short".

I have absolutely no problem with the Church saying that homosexuals should not and can not serve in any official capacity...that should be a rule in any Christian Church.

But, to say that we're not going to minister to sinners...?
139 posted on 10/29/2005 4:10:12 AM PDT by RavenATB (Patton was right...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: calreaganfan

meant to say "cohabitating" not "cohabiting"


140 posted on 10/29/2005 4:22:20 AM PDT by calreaganfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 341-342 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson